| Literature DB >> 30081525 |
Urja D Nimbalkar1, Julio A Seijas2, Rachna Borkute3, Manoj G Damale4, Jaiprakash N Sangshetti5, Dhiman Sarkar6, Anna Pratima G Nikalje7.
Abstract
A series of ten novel derivatives of 4-(benzyloxy)-N-(3-chloro-2-(substituted phenyl)-4-oxoazetidin-1-yl) benzamide 6a⁻j were synthesized in good yield from the key compound 4-(benzyloxy)-N'-(substituted benzylidene) benzo hydrazide, called Schiff 's bases 5a⁻j, by Staudinger reaction ([2 + 2] ketene-imine cycloaddition reaction) with chloro acetyl chloride in the presence of catalyst tri ethylamine and solvent dimethyl formamide (DMF), by using ultra-sonication as one of the green chemistry tools. All the synthesised compounds were evaluated for in vitro anti-tubercular activity against Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) and most of them showed promising activity with an IC50 value of less than 1 µg/mL. To establish the safety, all the synthesized compounds were further tested for cytotoxicity against the human cancer cell line HeLa and all 6a⁻j compounds were found to be non-cytotoxic in nature. The molecular docking study was carried out with essential enzyme InhA (FabI/ENR) of Mycobacterium responsible for cell wall synthesis which suggests that 6a and 6e are the most active derivatives of the series. The theoretical evaluation of cell permeability based on Lipinski's rule of five has helped to rationalize the biological results and hence the synthesized azetidinone derivatives 6a⁻j were also analyzed for physicochemical evaluation that is, absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity (ADMET) properties and the results showed that all the derivatives could comply with essential features required for a potential lead in the anti-tubercular drug discovery process.Entities:
Keywords: ADMET study; anti-tubercular screening; azetidinone; cytotoxicity study; green chemistry; molecular docking; ultra-sonication
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30081525 PMCID: PMC6222352 DOI: 10.3390/molecules23081945
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1The design protocol for the synthesis of the target molecules.
Scheme 1Synthesis of 4-(benzyloxy)-N-(3-chloro-2-(substituted phenyl)-4-oxoazetidin-1-yl) benzamide 6a–j.
Figure 2The mechanism of synthesis of 4-(benzyloxy)-N-(3-chloro-2-(substituted phenyl)-4-oxoazetidin-1-yl) benzamide 6a–j.
Optimization of reaction conditions for 4-(benzyloxy)-N-(3-chloro-2-(4-hydroxyphenyl)-4-oxoazetidin-1-yl) benzamide 6a derivative using various solvents with and without the use of a catalyst.
| Entry | Catalyst | Solvent | Method A Conventional Reflux | Method B Ultrasound Assisted | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time (h) | Yield (%) | Time (h) | Yield (%) | |||
| 1 | No Catalyst | Benzene | 22 | - | 6 | - |
| 2 | No Catalyst | 1,4-Dioxane | 15 | - | 6 | - |
| 3 | No Catalyst | DMF | 12 | - | 5 | - |
| 4 | Triethyl amine(TEA) | Benzene | 16 | 55 | 4 | 65 |
| 5 | Triethyl amine(TEA) | 1,4-Dioxane | 12 | 60 | 3 | 75 |
| 6 | Triethyl amine(TEA) | DMF | 08 | 70 | 2 | 88 |
Comparison of reaction kinetics of conventional refluxing and ultrasonic irradiation methods for the synthesized compounds 6a–j.
| Entry | Conventional Refluxing | Ultrasonic Irradiation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time (h) | Yield (%) | Time (h) | Yield (%) | |
|
| 08.00 | 70 | 02.00 | 88 |
|
| 06.00 | 65 | 02.00 | 82 |
|
| 06.50 | 72 | 02.10 | 80 |
|
| 07.00 | 70 | 02.20 | 79 |
|
| 07.50 | 71 | 02.15 | 80 |
|
| 08.00 | 65 | 02.00 | 79 |
|
| 07.50 | 67 | 02.00 | 86 |
|
| 07.50 | 61 | 02.30 | 81 |
|
| 08.00 | 66 | 02.00 | 78 |
|
| 08.00 | 65 | 02.00 | 79 |
In-vitro anti-tubercular activity, cytotoxicity, and molecular docking of synthesized derivatives 6a–j.
| Sr. No | Hela Cells IC50 μg/mL | Molecular Docking Score | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Score against 4TZK (-log Ki) | |||
|
| 0.652 | 82.62 | 8.647 |
|
| 0.918 | 54.855 | 6.9851 |
|
| 0.85 | 31.612 | 7.5334 |
|
| 1.343 | 70.36 | 6.9795 |
|
| 0.654 | >100 | 8.6156 |
|
| 1.715 | 44.087 | 6.34 |
|
| 0.718 | >100 | 8.476 |
|
| 0.85 | >100 | 7.082 |
|
| 1.309 | 89.187 | 6.9839 |
|
| 0.786 | 33.182 | 8.0345 |
|
| NA | NA | 6.073 |
|
| NA | 0.0056 | NA |
|
| 0.004 | NA | NA |
Figure 3Binding Pose and molecular interactions of 6a into the active site of InhA.
Figure 4Binding Pose and molecular interactions of 6e into the active site of InhA.
Figure 5Binding Pose and molecular interactions of Rifampicin into the active site of InhA.
The Pharmacokinetic parameters important for agents to have excellent oral bioavailability of synthesized compounds.
| ID | MW | % ABS | LogP | PSA | Rot. B | RigidB | HBD | HBA | Ratio H/C | Toxicity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 422.861 | 81.7899 | 4.1357 | 78.87 | 6 | 25 | 2 | 4 | 0.304 | Non Toxic |
|
| 436.888 | 85.5849 | 4.4387 | 67.87 | 7 | 25 | 1 | 4 | 0.291 | Non Toxic |
|
| 424.852 | 88.7692 | 4.5692 | 58.64 | 6 | 25 | 1 | 3 | 0.304 | Non Toxic |
|
| 441.307 | 88.7692 | 5.0835 | 58.64 | 6 | 25 | 1 | 3 | 0.304 | Non Toxic |
|
| 451.867 | 73.3477 | 4.7529 | 103.34 | 7 | 26 | 2 | 5 | 0.391 | Non Toxic |
|
| 466.914 | 82.4005 | 4.4473 | 77.1 | 8 | 25 | 1 | 5 | 0.32 | Non Toxic |
|
| 452.887 | 78.6055 | 4.1443 | 88.1 | 7 | 25 | 2 | 5 | 0.333 | Non Toxic |
|
| 466.914 | 78.6055 | 4.5344 | 88.1 | 8 | 25 | 2 | 5 | 0.32 | Non Toxic |
|
| 512.984 | 85.5849 | 6.0091 | 67.87 | 9 | 31 | 1 | 4 | 0.233 | Non Toxic |
|
| 412.889 | 79.0264 | 4.4916 | 86.88 | 6 | 24 | 1 | 4 | 0.333 | Toxic |
|
| 281.331 | 73.365 | 3.1975 | 103.29 | 5 | 13 | 2 | 4 | 0.583 | Non Toxic |
MW: molecular weight, LogP: logarithm of partition coefficient of compound between n-octanol and water, PSA: Polar surface area, n-RotBond: number of rotatable bonds, HBA: hydrogen bond acceptors and HBD: hydrogen bond donor.